Lowestoft MP Jess Asato to vote against assisted dying bill as it returns to Commons
Jess Asato says she believes the proposed law is “simply not safe”, as MPs prepare to debate legislation which would allow some terminally ill adults to seek help to end their lives.
Lowestoft MP Jess Asato has confirmed she will vote against proposed assisted dying legislation when it returns to the House of Commons on Friday.
Ms Asato, who is co-chair of Labour Against the Assisted Dying Bill, said her position had not changed since MPs considered the previous version of the legislation.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is due to receive its second reading today (Friday 11 September).
It would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales who are aged 18 or over, have mental capacity and are expected to die within six months to seek medical assistance to end their lives.
Ms Asato said she recognised the argument that terminally ill people should be able to make choices about the end of their lives, but said she believed that had to be balanced against the potential impact on vulnerable people.
She said: “There are a number of reasons for that, but the primary reason is because the bill is simply not safe.
“While I totally recognise that many people want to have the choice at the end of life, we need to make sure we're balancing people's right to have a choice with negative impacts on people who we ought to be protecting.”
Concerns over coercion
A central concern raised by Ms Asato is whether safeguards could identify cases where someone had been subtly pressured into seeking an assisted death.
Under the bill, two doctors would independently have to assess an applicant and be satisfied that they had a “clear, settled and informed wish” to end their life and had made the decision voluntarily, without coercion or pressure.
If both doctors approved the request, it would then go before a multidisciplinary Assisted Dying Review Panel.
Those panels would include a legal member, psychiatrist and social worker, with members required to undergo training relating to domestic abuse, including coercive control and financial abuse.
Ms Asato nevertheless argued that coercion could sometimes be extremely difficult to detect, including where pressure from relatives was indirect.
She said: “There is no such thing as a perfect choice, that people's life circumstances will always lead up to a choice.”
She added that pressure could be “very subtle”, including conversations within families which might influence someone who would otherwise have reached a different decision.
Later in the interview, she said: “Spotting coercion is incredibly hard and nobody, no matter how well trained they are, will be able to pick it up in every instance.”
Ms Asato said the irreversible nature of an assisted death meant she did not currently envisage changes which would make her able to support the principle of the bill, although she said she would continue seeking stronger safeguards if Parliament decided to proceed with it.
Concerns about safeguards are not confined to opponents within Parliament.
The Royal College of Physicians has said it continues to have “significant concerns” about whether the proposals adequately protect vulnerable people from coercion, while the British Geriatrics Society has also argued that safeguards are insufficient, particularly for older people.
However, a number of medical organisations have adopted neutral positions on the wider principle of assisted dying rather than opposing a change in the law.
Palliative care
Ms Asato also argued that improving palliative and end-of-life services should be prioritised.
The bill would require doctors discussing assisted dying with a patient to explain available palliative, hospice and other care, including symptom management and psychological support.
It would also require the Government to report on the availability and quality of palliative and end-of-life services as the legislation was implemented.
Ms Asato said: “We know in our country that we have had deep underinvestment in palliative and end of life care.
“I want to see us as a government invest in having the very best care at the end of life for everyone so that they don't have to choose to prematurely end their life.”
Research cited by the House of Commons Library earlier this month estimated that almost one in three people in England die with unaddressed symptoms or concerns, including pain or distress and little or no access to GP support, estimated by Marie Curie at around 170,000 people a year.
At the end of the interview, Ms Asato said she would prefer money required to establish an assisted dying service to be directed towards palliative care.
“I think that the government's already moving in the right direction, but of course we will have to keep campaigning to make sure that the government genuinely does act on palliative care so that we can improve it,” she said.
“I would much prefer to see the money that would go into the scheme and to pay for it going into palliative care instead.”
The Government's impact assessment estimates that the proposed Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner and review-panel system alone could eventually cost an average of between £11.2 million and £16.6 million a year, with a central estimate of £13.5 million.
The same assessment also considers potential reductions in expenditure on palliative and end-of-life care where a person has an assisted death, alongside the costs of establishing and operating the new service. The assessment stresses that its estimates are uncertain.
What would the bill do?
The legislation has been introduced by Labour MP Lauren Edwards as a private member's bill rather than a Government bill.
It would apply to adults aged 18 and over who are resident and registered with a GP in England or Wales, have mental capacity and have been diagnosed as terminally ill with six months or less to live.
Two doctors would assess the application independently, followed by consideration from an Assisted Dying Review Panel.
If approved, there would normally be a 14-day reflection period before the applicant could make a second declaration. Where death was considered imminent, that period could be reduced to 48 hours.
Provided the eligibility requirements continued to be met, a doctor could then prescribe an approved substance, which the individual would have to administer themselves.
The legislation would create an exemption from the existing criminal law for people acting within that process.
Outside the proposed system, intentionally encouraging or assisting another person's suicide would remain an offence under the Suicide Act 1961.
The previous bill ran out of time
The proposals follow an earlier Terminally Ill Adults Bill, which was approved by MPs in June 2025 before moving to the House of Lords.
It ultimately fell when it failed to complete all its parliamentary stages before the end of the 2024-26 session.
Peers had tabled more than 1,200 amendments during its Lords committee stage, covering issues including mental capacity, palliative-care assessments and the system for approving applications.
Only seven of the bill's 59 clauses had been agreed before Parliament was prorogued.
Lauren Edwards has said she wants the new legislation to pass without relying on the Parliament Acts, although she has not ruled out their use.
If passed, the Parliament Acts could potentially allow the Commons to overcome opposition from the House of Lords under certain circumstances.
Friday's second reading will determine whether MPs agree with the principle of the new bill and whether it should proceed to further parliamentary scrutiny.